pmaidhof

The set is similar to that of the GCS Test Scenario from back in September. For those interested, load mapquest and search for New Bern, NC. This action begins southwest of New Bern, between Maysville and Pollocksville, all along Highway 58. A "veteran" USMC LAR Company reinforced with 2x LAV-AT (total GCS rating of 8.28), and with 1x M-198 artillery battery in D/S (6.48) moves, from around Maysville, into a combat box centered around Pollocksville, NC, which is currently occupied by an "competent" OPFOR Recce Company (1.2324 per HNR2003 P.37) with a 122mm artillery battalion (2.16) in direct support. While the OPFOR is in "Prepared Defenses Level1", the US player opts for a "Hasty Attack". Since this is the first turn of a specific combat, the attacker rolls for surprise – unsuccessfully. US force equals (8.28+6.48) x1.8 veteran = 26.568. The OPFOR player benefits from the terrain (x1.2 Flat Wooded terrain), and his level of defense (x1.5 Prepared1), so (((1.2324+2.6) x1.5 competent) x1.5 prepared1) x1.2 terrain = 9.15948 For the Hasty Attack, the US player divides his GCS Rating by the OPFOR GCS Rating. 26.568/9.15948 = 2.9:1 but drops to 2.8:1. The OPFOR divides his GCS by his opponents. 9.15948 /26.568 = 1:2.8. 2D6 rolls are made by each player, who then determines what losses he received from enemy action. Turn 1 (30 minutes): both forces roll an 8. The US force has no effect, while the OPFOR suffers an “A” (Attrition point). Turn 2: US rolls a 8 = “NE”, while OPFOR rolls a 6 = “A, D” (one Disruption point). The attrition points accumulate while the one disruption causes the OPFOR’s defensive posture to drop from Prepared1 to Hasty Defense. (The defensive factor drops from 1.5 to 1.3. At this point we have to recalculate the odds. In order to save you from as much of the math as possible, the OPFOR’s GCS factor drops to 7.938216. A US mechanized company arrives in the box and is designated the reserve. Turn 3 (0900): Odds are recalculated to be 2.6:1 US and 1:2.6 OPFOR. Rolls of 6 and 3 respectively results in the US receiving an “A” (Attrition point), while OPFOR receives “2A,D” – the Recce Company becomes disorganized, and routs from the Pollocksville Combat Box north into the Cove City Combat Box. A platoon of M1-A1’s arrives in Pollocksville, added to the reserve. Turns 4-8: US moves the veteran (x1.8) mechanized rifle company (10.3721) and tank platoon (8.4), supported by the arty battery (6.48) into the Cove City Combat Box. These forces begin to plan a deliberate attack on enemy forces within this box. Due to the size of the units – a company and one half, I will roll on the battalion sized attacking planning row. We do not roll now, we must plan, issue orders (BAMCIS) etc. We roll beginning on the sixth turn of planning. The enemy forces include a “competent” (x1.5) leg infantry battalion (3.804), a ten tank T-72M company (16.0) and the 122mm arty battalion (2.6) in D/S. The terrain is still flat wooded (x1.2) (Author’s note: As I review my notes and write this, I neglected to include the terrain modifier in these calculations – shame on me.) OPFOR shells the mechanized company with 122mm throughout the turns, to no effect. Within the planning process, a section of AV-8B II is tasked with Close Air Support. They will be carrying 13 Mk-82 500lb bombs, and their GAU-16 cannon each. They will be on station throughout the first turn of the attack. On Turn 9 (1000), (the 6th turn after beginning the planning), it is the first to provide for an attempt at a completed planning process. US rolls successfully. Initial odds are 1.2:1 US and 1:1.2 OPFOR. US rolls to NE, and OPFOR earns an “A”. Turn 10: Air goes away, so odds must be recalculated. It is now essentially an even fight, 1:1. US rolls an “A. OPFOR gets a “A,D” – the disruption reduces the defense from “Prepared2” to “Prepared1”. Turn 11-14: Odds are recalculated but odds still end up 1:1. US accumulates 2A and one Disruption which reduces the Deliberate Attack to a Hasty Attack. OPFOR Turn 15 (1300): both combatants earn an “A”. The US’s 4th and the OPFOR’s 6th. Turn 16: both sides again earn an “A”. This is the OPFOR’s 7th and earns it the distinction of having to modify all further combat rolls with a -1. Turn 17 (1400): US receives an “A”, and OPFOR an “A,D” – their defense is beginning to crumble. It degrades from “Prepared1” to “Hasty Defense”. Turn 18: While odds are again recalculated, it still remains to be read along the 1:1 odds row. Both sides receive an “A” Turn 19 (1500): The US gets an NE result while OPFOR a “2A,D”. This changes OPFOR’s orders from Hasty Defense to Withdrawal”. At the end of this turn, the OPFOR units withdraw from the Cove City Combat Box. Losses Summary: US had a total of seven Attrition Points. They remained on the field of battle so these points are modified by x.5. That calculates to 3-4% losses depending on how you round this. OPFOR, since they retreated from the combat box, multiplies its total Attrition Points (11) x1%. Its losses amount to 11%. This passes the 10% threshold to modify the effected unit’s base GCS rating, so the infantry battalion is now 3.4236, and the tank company is now 14.4. Since the artillery was not “in” the box, but ranged it, I did not attrit it in any way. Comments: The omission of the x1.2 terrain modifier may have come into play as there were three recalculations in the deliberate attack which did not cause a change in odds. The 1.2 may have had an impact, at least once. This system calls for counter battery fire. In this situation, I toyed with it but decided it was not worth losing my arty battery in direct support, but will consider it in future scenarios where there may be enough arty assets to provide some in General Support – thus able to conduct counter battery fire without lowering the attacking forces chances for success. For thought; global security displays the Q-36 with 90 degree arc and 24km range, while the Q-37 with the same arc but 50km range. We would need to come up with an agreed upon pD for these, and similar OPFOR, counter battery radar, and what the combat results would be for counter battery fires. An entertaining exercise. Thanks

Nice find. Thanks!

PeterG posted H4 stats for the Valour Class FF. Until he does so here (wink-wink, nod-nod) this is the link. Valour FF Stats Thank you Peter Pete

No, just the high pitched voice of about an 8yr old grandchildren apparently surprised by the roar of the engines when the pair of tomcats overflew the crowd.

Here is a slide show with reminisings of Grumman retiree's and family members. Newsday Interactive Slide Show Right after a pair of F-14's overflew the crowd, I think I might have heard Tony (young wipper-snappers voice)

A floating junkyard’ Environmental risks keep mothball fleets at anchor By Marcus Wohlsen - The Associated Press Posted : Friday Jul 6, 2007 7:31:47 EDT BENICIA, Calif. — From afar, the ghostly warships recall a fierce phalanx ready for battle. A closer look, though, shows the rust and rot of ships unfit for duty or even dismantling, a quandary that is costing U.S. taxpayers millions of dollars and could cause environmental misery that will cost millions more. This is the Suisun Bay Reserve Fleet, a collection of once-valiant troop transports, tankers and other vessels dating back to World War II, Korea and Vietnam. Before they can be scrapped and sold, Coast Guard regulations require the removal of the barnacles and other sea creatures clinging to their hulls. That process causes toxic paint to flake off into the water, and fear of contamination has brought ship disposal to a halt in California, and delayed it in the U.S.’s other “mothball fleets” in Texas and Virginia. “The fleet has devolved from these historic and wonderful vessels into basically a floating junkyard,” said Saul Bloom of Arc Ecology, a San Francisco environmental group working to make the ghost ships disappear. “While they’re sitting there, they continue to pollute.” After World War II, the military designated several sites for ships withdrawn from active military service, among them Suisun Bay, a shallow, brackish body of water east of San Francisco Bay. For several decades, many stood ready to be called back into duty on short notice. But over time, most of the vessels in the fleet have become too decrepit to justify the cost of repairs. On the troop ship General Edwin D. Patrick, the wooden deck has turned black with rot, and grass grows through the cracks. Sea birds roost where soldiers once waited anxiously to go to war, and peeling paint exposes vast expanses of rust from bow to stern. “There’s really very little you can do to maintain a ship like this,” said Sean T. Connaughton, head of the U.S. Maritime Administration during a recent tour of the fleet. As a result, the Patrick and 53 other ships of the 74 in the Suisun Bay fleet are slated to be chopped up for scrap. About 140 out of the 190 in all three fleets are destined for disposal. The Maritime Administration sets aside about $1.2 million per ship for the dismantling program, though some if not all of that can be recovered by selling the scrap metal on the robust international steel market. By comparison, the federal government spends about $20 million a year to maintain the three reserve fleets. But agency officials say the potential cost of environmental damage caused by aging ships crumbling and sinking into the bay could dwarf the expense of the dismantling program. Under a congressional order, the Maritime Administration had a 2006 deadline to dismantle ships in reserve fleets classified as no longer useful. That has not happened. Maritime officials blame a lack of funding and a shortage of facilities able to perform the messy task of taking the massive ships apart. But recently, the more vexing environmental problem has also emerged. Owing to a lack of proper facilities on the West Coast, California ships headed for the scrap heap must first be towed through the Panama Canal to Brownsville, Texas, center of shipbreaking operations in the U.S. But on these towering hulks, mounted with guns stilled long ago and propellers nearly rusted through, thriving ecosystems cluster beneath the waterline. Millions of microscopic invertebrates in mosslike colonies several inches thick shelter barnacles, clams and tiny crustaceans. Some of these organisms have already devastated native San Francisco Bay species that lacked the defenses against the sudden introduction of invaders unwittingly transported from overseas. Hauling the uncleaned ships to Texas could spread these ecologically hazardous creatures even farther. Last year, divers using devices resembling floor buffers “scamped” several Suisun Bay ships to clean off the unwanted organisms, but tests of samples taken around the ships showed it was leaving toxic paint in the water. Until federal officials figure out how to keep the paint from contaminating the bay, California regulators have warned them to stop the cleaning or risk running afoul of state water laws. The conflicting regulations halted the scrapping not only of California’s mothball fleet but also the country’s two other reserve fleets in Beaumont, Texas, and on the James River near Newport News, Va. The discovery of the paint in Suisun Bay had led the Maritime Administration to place a moratorium on ship disposal in all three reserve fleets, though agreements with Virginia and Texas have paved the way for cleaning to resume. But regulators in California, along with environmentalists and members of the state’s congressional delegation still find the risk unacceptable. “We don’t want to see these kinds of things going into the bay,” said Keith Lichten, a senior engineer with the San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board. They also cite a February study suggesting paint is flaking off the ships on its own and dumping more than 21 tons of copper, lead, zinc and other metals into the ecologically sensitive estuary. Still, Connaughton has promised that by this time next year the environmental quandary will be solved and 15 crumbling ships will be gone from Suisun Bay. And Maritime Administration officials play down the environmental threat, arguing that heavy metals are found in sediments throughout the bay. The hulls of even the most rickety vessels are secure, according to fleet managers, with none likely to sink any time soon. “We’re trying to remove these vessels as quickly and safely as possible,” Connaughton said. “This has been a very difficult issue for all of us.” If any ships do go down, they would leave not only paint but PCBs, fuel oil and other pollutants into wildlife-rich waters. For sailors who served on them, the possible legacy of pollution adds further distress to the sorrow of seeing their cherished vessels cut up and destroyed. “I don’t think anyone is going to remember them except for the guys that served on them,” said Chris Plum, a hull technician in the 1980s on the fleet oiler Cimarron, a tanker slated for disposal. “Nobody cares. There’s more money in scrap.” Find Navy Times article here.

Mayport, JFK were terror targets, paper says By Zachary M. Peterson - Staff writer Posted : Thursday Jul 5, 2007 11:48:07 EDT A group of 45 Muslim doctors threatened terrorist attacks at Naval Base Mayport, Fla., the British newspaper the Telegraph reported Thursday. British authorities discovered details of the threats on a Web site run by a “cyber-terrorist” gang, the newspaper account said. The group of 45 doctors, which investigators believe have no link with the recently detained doctors and medics involved with car bomb attempts in London and Glasgow, planned to “undertake jihad and take the battle inside America,” according to the story. The first target was supposed to be the “naval base that gives shelter to the ship Kennedy,” thought to be a reference to the carrier John F. Kennedy, the story said. The Kennedy was decommissioned at Mayport in March. The message mentioned attacking strip clubs near the base and using six Chevrolet GT cars, three fishing boats and rocket-propelled grenades to blow up petroleum tanks, the Telegraph reported. A Navy spokesman at the Pentagon acknowledged the sea service was aware of the reports but would make no further comment. The threats were posted on a Web site run by three young radical Muslims, who were set to be sentenced by British authorities as the first defendants to be convicted of “inciting terrorist murder” on the Internet, the account stated. The three defendants were students in their early 20s, the paper said. They created chat forums to direct fighters to Iraq and discuss bomb attacks around the world. Films of hostages and beheadings were discovered by police, the Telegraph report noted. Find Navy Times article here.

I intend to back up to 1434-1436, have the sub at 5kts, and back up at at periscope depth to see if it has a better chance at passive detection, or even a visual detection in the next couple of turns. We'll see how that works out.

Wait a minute, I'm looking out my window here, I see terra firma, not the ocean floor. Birds chirping and everything. Thanks for your update. Pete from Long Island (first time caller, long time listener).

USS Carr (FFG-52) is on ASW Picket duty, screening between Isla la Tortuga and the isthmus north of Cumara. USS Shoup is conducting maritime inspections just north of Isla de Magarita. The Venezuelan Amur SS begins off of Cumara after transiting along the coast from its port in Puerto Cabello. Amur begins at periscope depth 25m. She has an aggressive commander, who will evade unless it is his primary target – the DDG. Amur and Carr begin 48.7nm apart. Sea State 4 0801-0830 Amur SS 315 @ 10kts Perry FFG 095 @ 10kts 40.7nm apart 0831-0900 Amur SS 000 @ 10kts, descends to Intermediate I Depth Perry FFG 095 @ 10kts 32.7nm apart 0901-0930 Amur SS 030 @ 10kts Perry FFG 095 @ 10kts 28.2nm apart 0931-1000 Amur SS 075 @ 10kts Perry FFG 095 @ 10kts 28.2nm apart 1001-1030 Amur SS 075 @ 10kts Perry FFG 095 @ 10kts 28nm apart 1031-1100 Amur SS 050 @ 10kts Perry FFG 095 @ 10kts 27nm apart 1101-1130 Amur SS 050 @ 10kts Perry FFG 095 @ 10kts 25.5nm apart 1131-1200 Amur SS 090 @ 10kts Perry FFG 095 @ 10kts 25.6nm apart SS is negotiating the area between Margarita and the isthmus near Cumana and the two islets in between. 1201-1230 Amur SS 090 @ 10kts Perry FFG 185 @ 10kts (accelerated in order to maintain speed in light of turning more than 45 degrees.) Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts current position 11.05.33N 63.47.41W (been patrolling, just not reported) 1231-1300 Amur SS 045 @ 10kts Perry FFG 230 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts 20.2nm apart (SS and DDG) 1301-1330 Amur SS 045 @ 10kts Perry FFG 275 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts 13.2nm apart (SS and DDG) 1331-1400 Amur SS 045 @ 10kts Perry FFG 275 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts 9.2nm apart (SS and DDG) 1401-1430 Amur SS 030 @ 10kts Perry FFG 275 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts 3.1nm apart Detection pre-work up Amur's LIRA LF-MF in Passive has a 50% Range of 3.0nm Target Noise: x1 Quiet Target Speed: x1 5kts Own Speed: x.5 10kts Sea State: x1 SS4 (ignored since own speed modifier is lower) Cross Layer: x.5 Sub at Intermediate I 51m+ 0.75nm x 0.40 = 0.3nm @ 75% 0.75nm x 1.1 = 0.8nm @ 50% 0.75nm x 1.5 = 1.1 @ 25% Burke's SQS-53C @ 5kts Passive rating of 3.0nm Target Noise x.5 VQuiet Target Speed x2 10kts Own Speed x1 5kts Sea State x1 (ignored) Cross Layer x.5 1.5nm x 0.40 = 0.6nm @ 75% 1.5nm x 1.1 = 1.7nm @ 50% 1.5nm x 1.5 = 2.3nm @ 25% 1431-1433 Amur SS 000 @ 10kts Perry FFG 275 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts 2.9nm apart 1434-1436 Amur SS 000 @ 10kts Perry FFG 275 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts 1.9nm apart Burke attempts detection: 2D10 = 21 CONTACT! Bearing 205 degrees. Burke attempts classification: Base LF-MF vs VQuiet = 0 Target Speed (10kts) Base +5 Tac Turns in contact = Base = 0 Need <=5; 2D10 = 89 No classification 1437-1439 Amur SS 000 @ 10kts Perry FFG 275 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts 1.4nm apart Burke orders Alert5 MH-60R to launch at 1441 on most recent bearing. Burke attempts to maintain contact (+15% per 4.4.3): 2D10 = 55 CONTACT! Bearing 224 degrees! Attempts classification: Needs <=10; 2D10 = 19 No classification. 1440-1442 Amur SS 000 @ 10kts Perry FFG 275 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts MH-60R launches at 1441 travels at 100kts, at Low Altitude. Travel 1.0nm drops 1x DICASS (P) Set for “Below Layer”. Turns to a heading of 315 degrees and drops 1x DICASS every 0.5nm for a total of 10x DICASS Sonar Buoys. Burke attempts to maintain contact: 2D10 = 39 Contact maintain, Bearing 253 degrees. Burke attempts to classify contact: needs <=15; 2D10 = 22, no classification SB #2 is at/within 1.0nm, which is within the 50% band. Attempts detection; 2D10 = 30. SB #2 Classification attempt: 2D10 = 40 = no classification. 1443-1445 Amur SS 000 @ 10kts Perry FFG 275 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts Burke attempts to maintain contact: 2D10 = 85 CONTACT LOST! MH-60R, drops SB#10 and then turns returning to SB#2. SB#2 attempts to maintain contact: 2D10 = 78 CONTACT LOST! Amur attempt detection of potential target of 1.1nm: 2D10 = 76 No contact. 1446.0 Amur SS 000 @ 10kts Perry FFG 275 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts MH-60R dips its AQS-22F Active Dipping Sonar into the Shallow Depth Band 1446 Detection: Amur cannot attempt detection of potential target. Amur's LIRA LF-MF in Passive has a 50% Range of 3.5nm (Flank Array) Target Noise: x1 Quiet Target Speed: x1 5kts Own Speed: x.5 10kts Sea State: x1 SS4 (ignored since own speed modifier is lower) Cross Layer: x.5 Sub at Intermediate I 51m+ Engagement Turns x.5 0.44nm x 0.40 = 0.18nm @ 75% 0.44nm x 1.1 = 0.44nm @ 50% 0.44nm x 1.5 = 0.66nm @ 25% Burke attempts to re-detect contact: 2D10 = 03 CONTACT Bearing 290 degrees. Burke attempts to classify 2D10 = 69 no classification. 1446.5 Amur SS 000 @ 10kts Perry FFG 275 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts MH-60R continues to dip the active sonar from Shallow to Intermediate Depth. 1447.0 Amur SS 000 @ 10kts Perry FFG 275 @ 10kts Burke DDG 135 @ 5kts MH-60R – Hovering 1447 Detection AQS-22F Active Rating 4 Speed (0) x1 Sea State (4) x1 Anechoic Coating x.5 Engagement Turn x.5 0.4nm @ 25% 1.1nm @ 50% 1.5nm @ 75% Range 2D10 = 26 Contact! Bearing 350 degrees, Range 0.5nm Amur cannot detect due to Passive Sonar Engagement Turn Factor rendering a too short range. What now El Captain?

How about putting a fence around these mothballed planes and maybe hiring a rent-a-cop or two.

Take solace Tony, they didn't get this one Anytime Baby...I

I created six pre-written standing order cards for the Amur. These addressed aggressiveness/timidity of the CO, above/below the thermocline, at/not periscope depth (if applicable), whether attack or evade upon detection. I shuffled and then selected "An aggressive commander, above the thermocline, at periscope depth, and he will evade if detected unless the detecting platform is his primary target." This means that the Amur is trying to get past the screening Perry and onto the maritime inspection force - currently a Burke.

Thanks Peter, I did stumble across this later in the day yesterday, but thanks again anyway.

Here is the best free source, that I've found so far, of relative ocean depths in the proposed area of operations. It appears from this that aside from a small very shallow band along the coast, that most of the AO (labelled Bonaire Basin in this graphic) is between 200-1,999 meters. Therefore it would appear to me, per 3.2.1 Depths and Depth Changes, that this would provide for the use of Towed Arrays, and the appearance of one Convergence Zone of 3nm at a range of 30nm from the sonar.

How did it go. We eagerly await an AAR, however brief.

It turned out that in event that the two forces, the Project 667 Amur (10kts) and the Perry FFG with SQR-19 deployed (10kts), got within detection range of one or both the towed array would have a small detection advantage over the sub provided the sub was under "the layer". If the sub were above the layer - in either the shallow or periscope depth, then the towed array detection range(s) would be halved due to 4.4.4.1 Direct Path and "The Layer". If the sub is below the layer and the sea state is 4, the SQR-19 can roll for passive detection of the VQuiet sub at 0.8/2.2/3.0nm (25%/50%/75% respectively). The sub's Lira sonar in passive mode (both Hull and Flank) would also suffer the 50% passive sonar range due to 4.4.4.1 in its attempt to detect the surface ship above the layer. I suppose that it is possible for the sub to detect the Towed Array without the 4.4.4.1 restriction? This is where solo gaming becomes a challenge, but I'll roll some dice, or select some pre-written out standing order cards to determine what depth the sub is at, along with my pre-rolled "start" bearing of the sub in relation to the FFG's position. I have not yet considered 4.4.4.2 Convergence Zones as I am uncertain of the general depth(s) of the area that I depicted in the areas between the Sub Base in Puerto Cabello, and La Asuncion (on Isla de Margarita) out to about 70nm. 4.4.4.2 says that when sonar is directed into Very Deep water (3.2.1 gives 1201 meters+) CZ's would occur initially at 30nm (Atlantic Ocean) increments. If this is presumed correct, there is a chance for one 3nm wide CZ between the sub base and the US force (if within 70nm of shore). All food for thought.

I'm currently working through the interaction of a Project 667 Amur SS and SQR-19 towed array-deployed from an O.H. Perry FFG, which is screening the currently abstracted maritime inspection forces. Just as a throw-away, har far off the coast becomes too far to be effective. I just through units on the plotter today and the Perry turned out being 100nm north of the city of Barcelona - too far in my opinion. Perhaps somewhere between 12 and 30nm, 12 being their national waters. Thanks

Thanks Jon, I'll need to get some of my spanish speaking friends to help me out on that one. I can however appreciate the pictures.

Thermocline (The Layer). If the surface ship's towed array deploys in Intermdiate I, below the layer, how close to shore does the thermocline extend, only close enough so that the depth "requirement" is met? Does this mean that towed arrays cannot be delpoyed in shallow water or simply not effective in shallow water due to the characteristics both geographically and acoustically?

4.4.2.3 Towed Array: "All towed arrays are either classified as Low Speed or High Speed arrays. This is the speed it can be towed without reducing its detection range because of flow noise." Is low or high speed defined anywhere - I'm guestimating that it is the 0-50% and 51-100% of the platforms speed per their data sheet?

Peter, Here are my interpretation of what Tony said to me in chat when he talked me through it. Open MapBuilder Ctrl+N for new set up Select the only one there - can type a new name. Right-click Layers and choose Import Layer (we're going to get the world outline first to help you with scaling the map) Find the TGWorldOutline.lyr file in the GIS folder of your plotter directory and open it up. Right-click Layers again, this time Add Data layer. Click the Raster button. Find your map graphic and Open. Click Edit Object and you should see a Yellow circle upper-right corner of graphic. Ctrl + Left mouse button in the image to move it around. Ctrl+Left mouse button in the Yellow circle to resize the image. When done click End Edit, then you can copy the created .sdb file into your plotter directory and load up the plotter, graphic should then be there Must be named temp.sdb in the plotter dir. It's really cool, enjoy it.

Peter, As I progressed, I realized that I needed to concentrate more on getting comfortable with submarine operations, sonar, TMA, torpedo attacks, etc. so I did not yet implement the sonar bouys in a full bore scenario. With so many ideas it may a take a week or two. Thanks for asking though, keeps me honest.

Cross posted from PeterG F-14 post. Venezuelas' F-16s have poor maintenance from 2003 due to lack of spares. They might have been fitted with Python 4 AAM 2004-06. Loadouts for Mi-17V5: 4 B-8 rocket pods or 2 B-8 rocket pods, 2 UPK-23 23mm gun pods MI-35M2 have the standard 12.7mm nose turret gun and are fitted with RWR, IR jammer, decoys, IR suppression, FLIR, laser designator, NVG. They have 4 HP vice the standard 6, estimated loadout 8 AT-6 Spiral, 2 B-8 rocket pods Mi-26T2 is used by the Army. You could use it to relocate radars or even, as In Vietnam, move aircraft from FOL to FOL. Don't firget teh Mirage 50EV with Cyrano IV radar and Exocet msls: 2 1700 L drop tanks, 1 AM.39 Exocet Block II, 2 Magic 2 msls SU-30MK2 have N-001V radar. they lack thrust vectoring or canards so are more like perhaps the Su-30MKI with standard SU-27 ATA? No idea on loadouts although R-73, R-77 and Kh-31A are possible." Thanks Peter.

With all of the sailors and airmen finding themselves doing somehwat traditionally infantry-type duties in combat theaters, those with time left on contract and who would otherwise be "enjoying" their "swing with the wing" may be hearing the echoing refrain "0300...you made it"